Thank you for being a member of the eResearch Australasia Conference Review Panel. Below are some tips to assist you.
Please complete all reviews by 24 July 2026. If you cannot make this deeadline please contact mail@conferencedesign.com.au ASAP so we can find alternative reviewers.
About the Conference
The eResearch Australasia Conference provides opportunities for delegates to engage, connect, and share their ideas and exemplars concerning new information-centric research capabilities, and how information and communication technologies help researchers to collaborate, collect, manage, share, process, analyse, store, find, understand and reuse information.
The conference will be held at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) from 26 – 30 October.
Presentation Formats
- Oral Presentations: 15 minutes plus 5 minutes for questions and changeover
- Birds of a Feather (BoF) sessions: 60 minutes
- Lightning Talks: 5 minutes
- Display Posters
- Pre and Post Conference workshops: Full Day or Half Day
Reviewer Notes
- The review process for the conference is single-blind peer review (reviewers know the identity of the author, but authors do not know the identity of reviewers).
- We anticipate that reviewers will be allocated approximately 10 abstracts. Abstracts will not be more than 250 words and will be in a structured format.
- More information regarding the abstract submission process and presentation formats can be found on the conference website – https://conference.eresearch.edu.au/abstracts/
- We ask that all reviews are completed by 24 July 2026.
Overview of the Abstract Reviewing Process
- The abstract reviewing process is overseen by the eResearch Australasia Conference Program Committee. All abstracts will be reviewed by at least two reviewers.
- Reviewers will be required to give each submission an overall rating on a scale of 1 – 9
- Please do not give a score of 7 to nearly all of your reviews, try and have a normal distribution of scores across them.
General scoring guidance
- 1-2 — Serious issues and I will argue to reject this proposal.
- 3-4 — Weak proposal, but I will not argue strongly against acceptance.
- 5-6 — OK proposal, but I will not argue for it to be accepted.
- 7-8 — Good proposal, and I will argue for it to be accepted.
- 9 — Outstanding proposal and I will argue for it to be accepted.
- Conflict of Interest – I have a conflict of interest and decline to review the submission.
We ask for comments for the Committee and for the Author. Please at a minimum give a short sentence to the Committee on why you have scored this paper as you have. If you would like additional guidance, you can use the rubric table below.
Reviewers should consider the following when rating each submission:
- Relevance & interest to eResearch community – the submission demonstrates “deep eResearch” in alignment with conference themes.
- Practical contribution to knowledge – the submission presents proven/demonstrated outputs, rather than possibilities from a yet to be undertaken project, or a current project description without recommendations/way forward.
- Potential for engagement & conference impact – the submission is appropriate to the chosen format and will enhance discussions and conference experience
- Diversity & inclusion contribution – the submission brings diverse perspectives to the conference.
- Exhibitor/sponsor submissions should address conference themes and foreground case studies in practice.
Reviewers will also need to consider and advise on the following:
- Their own level of expertise on the subject and confidence in their assessment on a scale of 1 – 5 (1 = very low, 5 = very high).
- Their recommendation for the abstract. Note, reviewers may recommend a submission be accepted in an alternative format to that requested. For example, a marginal Oral Presentation submission can be recommended to be accepted as a Lightning Talk or Poster.
- Whether they have a Conflict of Interest in reviewing the submission.
- Comments for the program committee to assist with the committee making decisions on final acceptance. Any comments to the committee will not be made available to the author.
- The need to provide comments for the author. These comments will be reviewed by the Program Committee and sent to the author upon delivery of their acceptance/rejection notification. If you have no comments this field can be left blank; however, we encourage constructive comments that provide helpful feedback to authors, e.g. to make corrections or for future submissions.
Once reviews have been completed, the Program Committee will review the scores, recommendations of the reviewers, and any comments to determine which submissions will be accepted.
Conflicts of Interest
To ensure the fair and equal review of submissions we ask all reviewers to advise if you have a conflict of interest in reviewing a submission.
A conflict of interest is a situation in which someone in a position of trust has competing professional or private interests. Such competing interests could make it difficult for an individual to fulfill his/her duties impartially and could improperly influence the performance of their official duties and responsibilities.
Conflicts of interest include:
- Being an author on the submission you are reviewing.
- An ongoing working or personal relationship with any authors associated with the submission you are reviewing.
- Currently working or have worked in the last two years at the same institution as any of the submitting authors.
If you have a conflict of interest please advise this in the online review portal and email the conference secretariat immediately (mail@conferencedesign.com.au) so the submission/s can be reassigned to another reviewer.
Online Review Portal
- Reviewers can log into the reviewer portal using the link sent to them via email.
- When reviewing abstracts, reviewers must click “Update” to save scores and comments. Reviewers will be able to come back to the record later and make changes if required.
- Once the review of an abstract is finalised select the “Completed” check box and click “Submit Completed Review”.
- Once the review has been completed, reviewers cannot make changes.
- Please contact the Conference Secretariat with any questions or issues regarding the portal: mail@conferencedesign.com.au.
